Tuesday, March 22, 2016

Islamic terrorists struck at the heart of Europe this
morning. President Obama marked the occasion by giving the matter fifty-two
seconds in a speech celebrating his collaboration with Communist Cuba. Then he
move on to a baseball game where he did the wave with Raoul Castro. At least,
he did not repeat yesterday’s embarrassment: his limp-wristed tribute to the
Cuban dictator.

For those who are curious to understand Obama’s reasoning,
here it is. The terrorists want to disrupt baseball games. We must not let them
disrupt baseball games. Having been president for more than seven years, Barack
Obama has learned that much about terrorism. It would be sad if it were not
pathetic.

Then again, our pusillanimous president bears some serious
responsibility for what is happening in Europe. New York Times columnist Roger Cohen made the case this afternoon:

It is
not working. President Obama’s slow-but-steady
strategy to defeat the Islamic State is clawing back a little territory in Syria and Iraq but is
doing nothing to dent the charismatic appeal of the militant group, disrupt its
propaganda or prevent it from killing Europeans.

He continued:

Since
the Paris attack, Obama has insisted that an anti-Islamic State coalition with
European and other allies is getting the job done. More than 20 percent of the
group’s territory has been recaptured. The president has suggested that more
radical military action to crush the militants — essentially the deployment of
infantry — would drag the United States into another Middle Eastern war and
increase the appeal of the Islamic State. His argument has been: Defeating the
Islamic State is militarily feasible, but then what?

This is
a very high-risk policy — too high in my view. It allows the Islamic State to
strut its pure evil in and from Raqqa. The Obama approach posits that the
Islamic State can be beaten before European and American societies are
undermined. Again today, speaking
in Havana, he said, “We will defeat those who threaten the safety and
security of people all around the world.” But the president does not say when
victory will come against these forces he declined to identify, and time
counts.

Now, if only Cohen could recognize that the European open
borders policy he favors has also contributed to the debacle, we would have
made progress.

Among those who have spoken out most cogently and who have
provided the most apposite analysis of the war today against terror was… Tony
Blair. One would like to think that a man of the political left, like Blair,
could sway the minds of the European leftists who have been coddling Islamist
terrorism. Alas, that would be far too optimistic.

Still, multiculturalists should read
the tea leaves and the coffee grounds and see what is going on in their own
nations, and ask themselves why they are doing nothing to stop it.

Of course, Blair might also have been addressing the leader
of the free world. His term “flabby liberalism” is more polite than “limp-wristed
liberalism.”

Tony
Blair has warned that ‘flabby liberalism’ is helping terrorists because
Britain’s elite feel too ‘guilty’ to tackle the spread of extremism.

The
former Labour prime minister said many in politics are now ‘unwilling to take
people on’, fearing that they will be seen as intolerant of other cultures.

Speaking
ahead of today’s terror atrocities in Brussels, he branded such an approach
‘ridiculous’ and said it had left our country’s liberal values vulnerable to
abuse.

Mr
Blair urged the establishment to ‘defeat violence’ by ‘attacking extremist
thinking’ in schools and wider society. And he said there needs to be a tougher
centre ground approach to migration and the refugee crisis, which for many
politicians is a still a toxic issue.

He told
the BBC: ‘We're in a situation where we have to fight back.

‘The
centre has become flabby and unwilling to take people on. We concede far too
much.

‘There's
this idea that you're part of an elite if you think in terms of respectful
tolerance towards other people. It's ridiculous.’

He
added that too often moderate voices are defensive about arguing their case,
fuelling a culture of extremism in religion and politics.

‘One of
the problems with the West is that it constantly can be made to feel guilty
about itself - and I'm not saying there aren't things we should feel guilty
about,’ he said.

‘But
you know, we shouldn't let people intimidate us into thinking there are certain
values we shouldn't be standing up for.

One must applaud a political leader who tells the world and
especially the American president to get over the guilt and to get engaged in
the fight.

2 comments:

UK and France took the lead in destroying Libya. Then, Libyan arms and fighters flowed to Syria and wrecked that place. And US tacitly let things get out of hand because it doesn't like Assad.

When it comes to wrecking the Middle East and North Africa, the West has not been 'flabby'. But when it comes to defending EU borders, it's been so flabby.

How about No Invade and No Invite. But oh my, the PC mantra is 'diversity is our strength.' So, more immigrants and migrants will have to be allowed in.

But terrorism is not the biggest problem. If anything, these attacks, tragic as they are, are good because they wake people up. It is the non-terrorist invaders who are more dangerous because they are sympathized with as 'economic migrants'. But if they keep coming and coming, their numbers will overtake the native population, and that will mean end of Europe.

Imagine if EVERY migrant were a terrorist. This massive migration would have been ended long ago with arms. But since most migrants are not outright violent, they've been welcomed with open arms.